They are not overreacting.

This offseason, after a largely disappointing 2009 campaign, the Cubs have made no significant additions to their 83 win team. They also are only rumored to be looking at tweaking, bringing maybe a bottom of the rotation starter or center fielder in.

In an era where those in player personnel often overreact to disappointing seasons, I wish it was more refreshing to see a GM who stays patient and plays for the long term.

The Cubs are in need of some roster change, and considering Hendry's job could be at stake following 2010 under new ownership, it is very surprising to see him concentrate mostly on dumping players (i.e. Milton Bradley and Kevin Gregg) rather than adding players.

The free agent market is thin, and the Cubs are close to maxed out on payroll. Hendry, however, has proven in the past to be pretty creative (pulling one-sided deals for Clement, Alfonseca, DLee, and ARam).

It is interesting that he has chosen to stay with this nucleus, especially since they have not won a postseason game in two trips.

This is the very reason why some additions/changes are needed. Even if you feel the 2009 club underperformed compared to talent (I would argue they are closer to an 83 win team than a 95 win team), this team was still not a World Series contender, which is the club's stated goal.

Yet, Hendry has stuck with Piniella, and the core group of guys like Lee, Ramirez, Soriano, Zambrano, Lilly, and Dempster.

I like many of those players, but even at their best, this team was first round playoff, central division champ team. They did not even sniff the League Championship Series.

For many teams and cities, competing for divisions and three straight winning seasons would be great. Heck, the Cubs would have killed for the past three seasons 10, 20, and 30 years ago.

The second highest payroll in the league, however, raises expectations. I think it is fair to expect this team to contend for the NL Pennant.

The current roster, however, does not seem capable of winning a pennant, and so far this offseason, the Cubs have tried for addition by subtraction.

Even if that works, it will only get them back to the level of play that got them swept in the first round of the playoffs.

Hendry is not gambling on anyone this offseason. Which is a surprise, since he could be gambling with his job.

Read more Chicago Cubs news on BleacherReport.com

His statistical trends, however, show that his Cub career has been poor, and is getting worse.

Soriano has not been up and down for three seasons, he has been consistently down every year. Here is a list of offensive statistics that have decreased in every year since 2006: Runs, hits, extra base hits, home runs, OBP, OPS, and Total Bases.

Should this be surprising? Not really. His OBP, Slugging Percentage, and OPS were better than his career average in 2007 and 2008. Before last year's abysmal season, which every player has once or twice, Soriano was performing just like the Cubs should have expected.

The problem is that they expected performance, less on par with his career averages, and more like his monster 2006. While somewhat dissapointing, his numbers (before las year) have been kind of average.

Why then is he potentially on his way to becoming the worst signing in club history? If he has had average stats so far, how could you compare him to the farces that were Todd Hundley, Milton Bradley, LaTroy Hawkins, etc?

The difference between Soriano and those players is the size and length of his contract, and how it completely has handcuffed the team from doing anything else.

Soriano was the ninth highest paid player in baseball in 2009. Even if you generally defend Soriano, you cannot make an argument that he is in the top 10 players in the game. There is no chance.

Even if you argue that his production has been mediocre. 16m dollars cannot buy you mediocre. If it does, your team will not be successful.

Back to the title, and the real issue with Mr. Soriano. His production as a Cub thus far has not earned him the title of "Worst Signing Ever." The title says, "Could..." become the worst. Our issue: the trends.

Production since '06 has gone down every year. His salary since '06? Up every year, and climbing. What did his awful 2009 earn him? A 2 million dollar raise for 2010. A season, that based on the trends, is likely to see even less production.

Worse still. He is going on 34 years old (so he says; it could be even older) and still has five years left on his contract? Do we really expect him to bounce back on the wrong side of 35? Since steroid testing, we are seeing less and less production out of players in their upper 30's.

I hope that he does bounce back. I am rooting for him and the Cubbies, like always. The trends are disturbing, however, and we still have five years and 90 million more dollars to go.

Let's all hope my prediction is wrong, but I'll bet its not.

Soriano will be the worst signing in Chicago Cub history.

Read more Chicago Cubs news on BleacherReport.com

What is sad is that the Cubs have the highest payroll in the league, and both of these players are going to be considered too expensive.

What's worse? Both of these players would fulfill enormous needs for the Cubs. In fact, they are the two biggest needs of the current Cub team.

Despite the Milton Bradley experiment, the Cubs lineup is still extremely right handed and more lefties should be targeted. Granderson would be a perfect fit. Although he does not have great OBP numbers, he does have experience at the top of the lineup and fills a need in CF.

He is also the "anti-Bradley", in the sense that he is a great clubhouse guy, Chicago native, and only 28-years old.

While I would categorize the likelihood of Granderson becoming a Cub as unlikely, Halladay coming to the Northside falls somewhere between pigs flying and Sammy Sosa turning into a white guy (wait, maybe that is a bad example). Regardless it is very unlikely.

Timing is everything. The Cubs were big spenders when they needed SP depth and corner outfielders. Two expensive dissapointments and Ted Lilly later, the Cubs are locked into expensive, long term contracts with players on the wrong side of 30.

What are their needs now? A frontline starter and CF/leadoff man. There are two for the taking, but the Cubs cannot afford to be spenders after swinging and missing on Bradley, Fukudome, and Soriano.

It is disappointing. It is, however, what happens when you make mistakes on free agents. The Yankees did it, and it took getting Jason Giambi, Carl Pavano, etc. off the books before they could make another run.

The Cubs are in the same boat. It is time for fans to be patient. This team is seriously flawed in places, but it is going to take clearing some bad contracts before the team is able to seriously address their needs.

Maybe when Halladay and Granderson are even older and on the free-agent market, the Cubs can overspend for multiple years for them then. Until then, we have to keep dreaming.

Timing is everything, and the timing simply does not work in the Cubs favor in the short term. Halladay and Granderson will help other ballclubs.

The 2010 Cubs will look an awful lot like the 2009 Cubs.

Read more Chicago Cubs news on BleacherReport.com

On ESPN 1000's "Waddle and Silvy" show today, Piniella talked about next year's team. It seems clear that Bradley is not in the plans.

"We needed a big bat to put in the middle part of our lineup, and we thought Milton would be the one. And it just didn't work out, for whatever reason. So we move forward from there and now we try to find somebody else."

Bradley with the Cubs was never a good fit. Whether they should have known that beforehand is irrelevant at this point. The question is whether or not the Cubs will find a taker for the remaining portion of his contract, and who do is the middle of the order bat the Cubs will take on in his place.

There will be several free agent outfielders available. Jason Bay, Bobby Abreu, and Adam Dunn to name a few.

I believe the Cubs are more than one bat away from beating the Cardinals in the Central in '10. (see http://bleacherreport.com/articles/260424-breaking-up-is-hard-to-lou-cubs-piniella-needs-to-go) They will be in need of an overhaul, and a poor 2010 under new ownership may spark that overhaul.

The highest payroll in the league and two straight underperforming, playoff-less seasons would probably mean a new manager (Piniella's contract will be up) and general manager.

For now, however, both Hendry and Piniella have to hope they can tweak this team back to the playoffs for next season. Certainly sending the hapless Bradley on his way is a start.

Read more Chicago Cubs news on BleacherReport.com

Lou has mentioned himself that this year's club lacked the chemistry of the past few years. I agree. The 2007 and 2008 team's must have had good chemistry, because the team was not extremely talented.

The lack of talent is Jim Hendry's responsibility (see http://bleacherreport.com/articles/258580-wait-til-next-year-2010-cubs-to-look-awfully-familiar) but Lou is not without blame either.

While the manager can have an effect on team chemistry, there is something much more important he must do. He has to demand that his players play baseball the right way.

I am a baseball guy, but I understand that it is not interesting reading to go over the particulars and niches of baseball gameplay. The Cubs, however, are terrible baserunners, situational hitters, and have regulars with very poor fundamentals.

Players are not perfect. They will make mistakes. My only question is- are the players being held responsible for the mistakes they make.

For instance, if Geovony Soto rolls over a groundball with no outs and a runner on 2nd (as he did on Wednesday night), does he hear about it? For a guy who was suppossed to be a no-nonsense type manager, I have NEVER seen him confront a player in the dugout.

I understand that "humiliating" a player in the dugout in front of cameras and fans may not be his style. I am left then to assume that he is taking care of business behind closed doors. Lou, however, has lost that benefit of the doubt because his players continue to do these type of things.

So if Lou is given a pass on team chemistry, which I am willing to grant. He cannot get a pass on the brand of baseball his team plays. I like that he demands they play hard, but I do not think they play smart. This is his No. 1 priority. He has to communicate how to play the game with your head as well as with your athleticism. 

Lou's time has passed; Hendry's has too. It is time to move on with this administration and with this roster.  

Read more Chicago Cubs news on BleacherReport.com

Every year, an average Major League Baseball team turns over around twenty percent of its roster.

Chicago Cubs fans looking toward 2010 are hoping that that number is more like eighty percent.  The core of this roster has gelled and played well together over the last few years.  This year, however, this roster's shortcomings have finally caught up with them. If you ask Jim Hendry or Lou Piniella, they will tell you that this year was not short lapse.

Sadly, the Cubs' problems are much more serious from a structural standpoint, and they are in danger of going into relapse.

What's wrong?  The Cubs have some solid players and good individual parts.  Derrek Lee put together a very nice season.  Aramis Ramirez is an underrated cleanup hitter and has made the offense go.  Zambrano is solid and an inning eater.  Marmol has very good stuff.  These players, however, are far from stars.

The Cubs have no great players.  There is no future hall of famer.  There is no perennial all-star.  When the going gets tough, Albert Pujols carries the St. Louis Cardinals offense.  Tim Lincecum wins when his start rolls around.  Who are those guys for the Cubs?  Zambrano is inconsistent and a bit injury-plagued of late.  Lee and Ramirez are both good players, but not guys you are going to hitch your wagon to.

The second major shortcoming with this team is the fact that there seems to be no systematic evaluation of players in order to make sure they fit in with this club.  What is the Cubs identity?  What does the typical Cub look like?  Do they ever look at a player and think, "Sure he's talented, but he does not fit into our system."

The truth is there is no typical Cub.  Talent-wise, they are an amalgymous mix of random players who were the best available options at the time of their arrival in Chicago.

Why can't this change overnight?  Systems are built from the top-down.  I like Jim Hendry, but he is not a system guy.  He's old school.  He's a scout/coach.  A general manager has to be more of a CEO, implementing and executing a vision for a massive organization.  Hendry is a great guy and a great baseball guy.  He is also a great talent evaluator.  Unfortunately, that does not make for a great GM.

Here are some specific problems with a Cub overhaul for 2010.  The core players are signed past this season and have little trade value.  Ramirez has been injured a lot. Zambrano has too.  Fukudome and Soriano are being payed massively for little contribution, and no one will take on those contracts.  Who else will bring you anything in return?  Ted Lilly and Ryan Dempster may, but you would be trading 40 percent of your starting staff and have few options behind them.

There are also no impact free agents availabe this off-season.  With no trade pieces and no free agents, the only option for an overhaul is to give guys away for nothing, eat contracts, and start over.  Not a bad option for some teams.  Hendry, however, has a new boss and it seems unlikely that he is willing to pin his job on the hopes of a "rebuilding" roster. 

All of these facts mean one thing.  The 2010 Cubs will look eerily like an underachieving 2009 team.  Hendry and Lou will roll out the same core group of guys, cross their fingers, and hope 2008 magic happens again.  Problem is, 2008 still netted a first round playoff sweep.  Why?  Because this team actually overachieved in '07 and '08.  2009 was much more indicative of this team's actual talent than the previous two seasons were.

Read more Chicago Cubs news on BleacherReport.com

Every year, an average Major League Baseball team turns over around twenty percent of its roster.

Chicago Cubs fans looking toward 2010 are hoping that that number is more like eighty percent.  The core of this roster has gelled and played well together over the last few years.  This year, however, this roster's shortcomings have finally caught up with them. If you ask Jim Hendry or Lou Piniella, they will tell you that this year was not short lapse.

Sadly, the Cubs' problems are much more serious from a structural standpoint, and they are in danger of going into relapse.

What's wrong?  The Cubs have some solid players and good individual parts.  Derrek Lee put together a very nice season.  Aramis Ramirez is an underrated cleanup hitter and has made the offense go.  Zambrano is solid and an inning eater.  Marmol has very good stuff.  These players, however, are far from stars.

The Cubs have no great players.  There is no future hall of famer.  There is no perennial all-star.  When the going gets tough, Albert Pujols carries the St. Louis Cardinals offense.  Tim Lincecum wins when his start rolls around. 

Who are those guys for the Cubs?  Zambrano is inconsistent and a bit injury-plagued of late.  Lee and Ramirez are both good players, but not guys you are going to hitch your wagon to.

The second major shortcoming with this team is the fact that there seems to be no systematic evaluation of players in order to make sure they fit in with this club.  What is the Cubs identity?  What does the typical Cub look like?  Do they ever look at a player and think, "Sure he's talented, but he does not fit into our system."

The truth is there is no typical Cub.  Talent-wise, they are an amalgymous mix of random players who were the best available options at the time of their arrival in Chicago.

Why can't this change overnight?  Systems are built from the top-down.  I like Jim Hendry, but he is not a system guy.  He's old school.  He's a scout/coach.  A general manager has to be more of a CEO, implementing and executing a vision for a massive organization.

Hendry is a great guy and a great baseball guy.  He is also a great talent evaluator.  Unfortunately, that does not make for a great GM.

Here are some specific problems with a Cub overhaul for 2010. 

The core players are signed past this season and have little trade value.  Ramirez has been injured a lot. Zambrano has too.  Fukudome and Soriano are being payed massively for little contribution, and no one will take on those contracts. 

Who else will bring you anything in return?  Ted Lilly and Ryan Dempster may, but you would be trading 40 percent of your starting staff and have few options behind them.

There are also no impact free agents availabe this off-season.  With no trade pieces and no free agents, the only option for an overhaul is to give guys away for nothing, eat contracts, and start over.  Not a bad option for some teams. 

Hendry, however, has a new boss and it seems unlikely that he is willing to pin his job on the hopes of a "rebuilding" roster. 

All of these facts mean one thing. 

The 2010 Cubs will look eerily like an underachieving 2009 team.  Hendry and Lou will roll out the same core group of guys, cross their fingers, and hope 2008 magic happens again. 

Problem is, 2008 still netted a first round playoff sweep.  Why?  Because this team actually overachieved in '07 and '08.  2009 was much more indicative of this team's actual talent than the previous two seasons were.

Read more Chicago Cubs news on BleacherReport.com